digbybk

11 ms·

61.
by digbybk 3y ago
> No FP wrappers. That fad is over. RIP your co-workers if you introduced that headache into your codebase. Definitely not team or human friendly. Can someone comment on this from the linked tweet? I haven’t been a js dev in a long time.
62.
by digbybk 3y ago
Has the SE gotten bigger? I have an old SE that’s pretty small, I was hoping that when I upgraded I’d still have that option.
63.
by digbybk 3y ago
> The raw materials are fairly cheap, and the production involves heating it to hundreds of degrees centigrade for 24-48 hours Can you also ELI5 why this seemed like such a hard problem to solve up until now? Was it something hiding in p
64.
by digbybk 3y ago
Except at the time “farmers will be broke” would have meant “everyone will be broke” because most of the labor force was farming. Instead, farmers became a tiny part of the economy while food became increasingly abundant. Tractors were a go
65.
by digbybk 3y ago
I'm not entirely sure what we're supposed to take from this. Are you saying that they are not actually AI experts, and we're returning to the claim that only people who do not understand the tech are concerned about these ris
66.
by digbybk 3y ago
I was actually thinking of a podcast interview I just listened to that Sam Harris did with Marc Andreessen, so just one person over the course of a long conversation.
67.
by digbybk 3y ago
One of the guys who invented back propagation, Geoffrey Hinton, for one. Of the three people who won the Turing Award for AI research, two are sounding the alarm. Hinton said he’s most concerned about the existential risk.
68.
by digbybk 3y ago
About “pandering to authority”, I keep seeing this move in debates: - people with safety concerns just don’t understand the tech. - “here’s a list of people with safety concerns who demonstrably do understand the tech very well” - you’re p
69.
by digbybk 3y ago
> You're right, of course. Possibly this is the first time that this sentence has appeared in a comment in the history of the internet.
70.
by digbybk 3y ago
I think this comes down to how we're using the words "we". Galileo transformed how "we" see the world, but not a whole lot of people at the time appreciated the implications of what he was saying. I think we need to
71.
by digbybk 3y ago
Looking for aliens is worthwhile because discovering alien life would transform how we see the universe and ourselves, not because it’s easy. That’s like saying the more one looks for fundamental physics the less worthwhile it is. We would
72.
by digbybk 3y ago
I didn't enjoy it as much as I expected to, since everyone I know loves it. Made me doubt myself.
73.
Arizona, Low on Water, Weighs Taking It from the Sea. In Mexico(nytimes.com)
9 points by digbybk 3y ago|1 comments
74.
by digbybk 3y ago
Do we know how his views changed, if at all, over the years?
75.
by digbybk 3y ago
I vacillate between excitement for the future and fear that people like Kaczynski are right (not the violence, obviously). It often does feel as though the direction of technological progress is independent of what is best for the wellbeing
76.
by digbybk 3y ago
You’re allowed to come to New York. Just leave your car at home.
77.
by digbybk 3y ago
Years of auto and oil industry propaganda has deluded people into equating freedom of movement with car ownership. My freedom of movement is violated when the subway isn’t moving. For people on a bus stuck in traffic, their freedom of movem
78.
by digbybk 3y ago
This is the advantage of self driving. If there is an error it gets fixed for all cars in the fleet. Humans have bugs - we get bored, we get distracted, we get angry, we thrill seek, etc - and we’ll never fix our bugs. Nor should we. Any te
79.
by digbybk 3y ago
The argument is: "we are intelligent and seem to be able to build new intelligences of a certain kind. If we are able to build a new intelligence that itself is able to self improve, and having improved be able to improve further, than
80.
by digbybk 3y ago
You can also ask that question about the other side. I suppose we need to look closely at the arguments. I think we’re in a situation where we as a species don’t know the answer to this question. We go on the internet looking for an answer
81.
by digbybk 3y ago
There are multiple risks that people talk about, the most interesting is the intelligence explosion. In that scenario we end up with a super intelligence. I don’t feel confident in my ability to asses the likelihood of that happening, but a
82.
by digbybk 3y ago
I actually do hope you're right. I've been looking forward to an AI future my whole life and would prefer to not now be worrying about existential risk. It reminds me of when people started talking about how the LHC might create a
83.
by digbybk 3y ago
I’ll have to dig it up but the last interview I saw with him, he was focused more on existential risk from the potential for super intelligence, not just misuse.
84.
by digbybk 3y ago
Hinton said that the ability to explain a joke was among the first things that made him reassess their capabilities. Not the only thing. You make it sound as though Hinton is obviously clueless yet there are few people with deeper knowledge
85.
by digbybk 3y ago
I’m open minded about this, I see people more knowledgeable than me on both sides of the argument. Can someone explain how Geoffrey Hinton can be considered to be clueless?
86.
by digbybk 4y ago
Curious, have you seen examples of someone convincing it of something clearly wrong? Think I’ve seen examples of that with gpt3 but not 4 that I can recall.
87.
by digbybk 4y ago
Chomsky's linguistics is a topic that I'm endlessly fascinated by and also too dumb to really grok (there are a lot of topics like that, it's kind of a curse). Love to get some good explanations/resources if anyone has a
88.
by digbybk 4y ago
It's the maximum speed of causality, not the speed at which all things are caused. The speed limit of causality. If the rest of the theory of relativity was correct but there wasn't a maximum speed, then it would be possible for a
89.
by digbybk 4y ago
I asked it what season of Community is referred to as “the year of the gas leak”. It answered season 2. I said “that’s incorrect”. It apologized and said that it’s really season 3. “Still wrong”. “I apologize, the year of the gas leak is se
90.
by digbybk 4y ago
I definitely don’t want to say that choosing family over work isn’t the optimal path to happiness. My point is that decisions are largely made on emotion, and we’re bad at remembering past emotion.

More ›